Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
trymahjong

Ted Cruz seeking to revive NASA 'core mission'

Recommended Posts

REad this on front page- below a few bits from chron.com

Sort of interested in what everyone thinks. . . .

In these modern times when social media is a key political battleground, it pays for politicians to have a bulldog behind the scenes typing tweets and making Facebook posts that go viral.

Earlier this week Senator Ted Cruz’s social media brain Josh Perry was profiled by CNN. Dubbed the “Twitter whisperer”, Perry’s in-house digital strategist (something that didn’t exist a decade ago) cultivates the messages that Cruz’s followers see on their feeds daily.

Even while he was in Houston for jury duty, Perry kept Cruz’s social media wing humming.

Late last year Politico crunched the numbers on what politicians get mentioned the most on social media, with Cruz and Hillary Clinton far and away the most popular.

“Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz together accounted for 40 percent of the discussion on Facebook and nearly half — 47 percent — of mentions on Twitter among 10 top presidential possibilities in the past three months,” wrote Hadas Gold at Politico.

For a three-month period in the fall, Cruz was mentioned 4.55 million times, with Clinton logging “just” 2.85 million mentions.

Edited by trymahjong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does anything that you just said have to do with the title you wrote?

I was going to ask the same thing. Is this a presidential candidate thread or are we concerned about a huge Anti-Science/NASA congressman overseeing said things?

Edited by Montrose1100
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to ask the same thing. Is this a presidential candidate thread or are we concerned about a huge Anti-Science/NASA congressman overseeing said things?

Or is it pro-Houston and a good-intentions wish to revive Houston to "Space City" status?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or is it pro-Houston and a good-intentions wish to revive Houston to "Space City" status?

 

yeah because talking about how many hits on facebook and twitter Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz have speaks volumes about how much Ted Cruz wants to revive NASA's 'core mission' lol

 

Unless Ted Cruz wants to revive NASA by landing a facebook server on the moon! Then I question why this thread exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or is it pro-Houston and a good-intentions wish to revive Houston to "Space City" status?

Yes and the sky is made of gum drops. Sorry that was my knee-jerk reaction. Wishful thinking. Ted Cruz, as most Texas Republicans, are very anti-science. science bad.

Science promotes independent thought. Independent thoughts bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ted Cruz, as most Texas Republicans, are very anti-science. science bad.

Science promotes independent thought. Independent thoughts bad.

Well, I was trying to make my post seem kind of ambiguous politics-wise. That could be a noble effort, or a case of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

I don't agree with the anti-science comment...not that I'm trying to get into a debate on what Republicans believe, but it bothers me more when people pull out the "Republicans are anti-science" song and dance, then will turn right around and happily believe some pseudo-science about how GMO foods and artificial colors are destroying your health, even though real science says things contrary to the sort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess this was an oops for me--sorry

I have trouble with cut and paste because of some new virus protection and trying to citing chron.com is tricky when you have to sign up in order to view the article-plus now that page of paper is no where to be found in my house.

AFter I had read it I  was struck by the possibility that NASA would be in Ted Cruz cross hairs-and wanted to see what others thought-

I'm not too good at google either but here's a paragraph on what I remember as the gist of what I read

 

Since NASA retired its shuttle program in 2011, US astronauts have been flying aboard Russian Soyuz spacecrafts to reach the International Space Station. Last year, NASA renewed a contract with Russia to continue ferrying US astronauts to space that cost the agency $457.9 million for six seats on a Soyuz spacecraft.
Cruz's home state of Texas is home to one of NASA's major field centers, the Johnson Space Center. The facility has gained fame for its role as "mission control" on many manned space missions.

Due to his conservative positions on budgeting and climate change, some observers speculated Cruz would attempt to cut funding to NASA in his new role. However, in his statement Cruz repeatedly insisted he wants to expand America's space-exploration efforts.

"Texas has a major stake in space exploration," he said. "Our space program marks the frontier of future technologies for defense, communications, transportation and more, and our mindset should be focused on NASA’s primary mission: exploring space and developing the wealth of new technologies that stem from its exploration. And commercial space exploration presents important new opportunities for us all."

 

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-ted-cruzs-epic-plan-for-nasa-2015-1#ixzz3OrRQOcUo

 

  NASA  expanded to explore/research other things in addition to Space exploration like climate change--where would be get information in those additional  areas if NASA wasn't doing it. It's scary to think that it might be curtailed (halted?) through budget cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, the use of satellites to monitor the weather, and charting what the weather does over a period of years, is actually in support of some sort of political agenda.

 

It's a bit precious to complain about budget cuts when your own party has controlled the side of Congress that originates revenue bills for years, has a hammerlock on the other one, that demagogues about the evils of spending (unless it's for the military and whatever "security" happens to be), and can't seem to grasp that investment is a form of spending.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with the anti-science comment...not that I'm trying to get into a debate on what Republicans believe, but it bothers me more when people pull out the "Republicans are anti-science" song and dance, then will turn right around and happily believe some pseudo-science about how GMO foods and artificial colors are destroying your health, even though real science says things contrary to the sort.

It's pretty obvious that Texas ® representatives are anti-science. It's not a song and dance, it's fact. Just so you know any Pseudo-science bothers me too. I'm a Cancer, can you tell? Just kidding.

 

Republicans are very good at this sort of thing. By thing I mean placing people like Ted Cruz, who consistently votes to lower NASA's budget, in charge of NASA's budget. 

 

I'm singling out the Republicans on this because to me Science/Education is one of the things nobody should F* with. I know the Democrats are guilty of this practice as well, but the Republicans are hell bent on making sure our country doesn't stand a chance in future competition of space and science.

 

I don't really feel any party association. The Dem's just vote more so in favor of things I agree with than the Republicans.

 

Before I go off the handle, I know the private space companies are picking up a little steam so I'll hold off on the doom and gloom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and the sky is made of gum drops. Sorry that was my knee-jerk reaction. Wishful thinking. Ted Cruz, as most Texas Republicans, are very anti-science. science bad.

Science promotes independent thought. Independent thoughts bad.

 

... says the self-confessed knee-jerker.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he'll change it from Muslim Outreach back to it's core mission.

"Muslim Outreach"? Where is this nonsense coming from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can pasting in a cel from The Simpsons really be considered independent thought?  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can pasting in a cel from The Simpsons really be considered independent thought? :ph34r:

I know tone of voice and level of sarcasm can be missing from reading someone's post on the internet... But that's a question that will dip too far into philosophy for me to begin to answer.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know tone of voice and level of sarcasm can be missing from reading someone's post on the internet... But that's a question that will dip too far into philosophy for me to begin to answer.

I can google "republicans anti science" and get all sorts of hits, either from people arguing against that notion or propagating it (almost all left wing sources). Hardly an independent thought...sounds like parroting your media company of choice.

On the flipside, true "independent thoughts" are almost always universally stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can google "republicans anti science" and get all sorts of hits, either from people arguing against that notion or propagating it (almost all left wing sources). Hardly an independent thought...sounds like parroting your media company of choice.

On the flipside, true "independent thoughts" are almost always universally stupid.

First of all, Iron, of course it's not an independent thought. Facts are not thoughts. Second, the only media company I pay the slightest bit of attention to is the BBC.

Third, your last statement is ludicrous. If Issac Newton didn't have an "independent thought", about an apple hitting him, where would we be today? I certainly wouldn't call that universally stupid.

Anyways... Iron, I think you contribute to this forum greatly, I can respect your opinion, and I'll leave it at that. I was mostly tossing a little fun in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know tone of voice and level of sarcasm can be missing from reading someone's post on the internet... But that's a question that will dip too far into philosophy for me to begin to answer.

 

awwwww... and here I was just posing a koan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can google "republicans anti science" and get all sorts of hits, either from people arguing against that notion or propagating it (almost all left wing sources). Hardly an independent thought...sounds like parroting your media company of choice.

On the flipside, true "independent thoughts" are almost always universally stupid.

 

So someone who is pursuing unknowns - a physicist/biologist/chemist/astronomer etc. - is generally stupid because they must (by the very nature of what they are attempting) use free and independent thought to arive at whatever conclusions their research or examinations will determine?

 

The very idea of pursuing a masters degree or doctorate of philosophy is to examine a problem that has yet to be solved (and in some cases even asked) and resolve it, or at the very least shed light upon the problem.  Those independent thoughts should fill the average person with wonder and hope, not fear. 

 

conservative (defined): holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, Iron, of course it's not an independent thought. Facts are not thoughts. Second, the only media company I pay the slightest bit of attention to is the BBC.

Third, your last statement is ludicrous. If Issac Newton didn't have an "independent thought", about an apple hitting him, where would we be today? I certainly wouldn't call that universally stupid.

Anyways... Iron, I think you contribute to this forum greatly, I can respect your opinion, and I'll leave it at that. I was mostly tossing a little fun in.

Well, to be honest, I was thinking "independent thoughts" as to be off the wall crazy stuff at the time. However, the "Republicans are anti science", is in fact an opinion. It would be a fact to say "Ted Cruz is ignoring scientific evidence supporting global warming" or something (if that was indeed true)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...